The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 44 of 995
Back to Result List

Morphosyntactic but not lexical corpus-based probabilities can substitute for cloze probabilities in reading experiments

  • During reading or listening, people can generate predictions about the lexical and morphosyntactic properties of upcoming input based on available context. Psycholinguistic experiments that study predictability or control for it conventionally rely on a human-based approach and estimate predictability via the cloze task. Our study investigated an alternative corpus-based approach for estimating predictability via language predictability models. We obtained cloze and corpus-based probabilities for all words in 144 Russian sentences, correlated the two measures, and found a strong correlation between them. Importantly, we estimated how much variance in eye movements registered while reading the same sentences was explained by each of the two probabilities and whether the two probabilities explain the same variance. Along with lexical predictability (the activation of a particular word form), we analyzed morphosyntactic predictability (the activation of morphological features of words) and its effect on reading times over and aboveDuring reading or listening, people can generate predictions about the lexical and morphosyntactic properties of upcoming input based on available context. Psycholinguistic experiments that study predictability or control for it conventionally rely on a human-based approach and estimate predictability via the cloze task. Our study investigated an alternative corpus-based approach for estimating predictability via language predictability models. We obtained cloze and corpus-based probabilities for all words in 144 Russian sentences, correlated the two measures, and found a strong correlation between them. Importantly, we estimated how much variance in eye movements registered while reading the same sentences was explained by each of the two probabilities and whether the two probabilities explain the same variance. Along with lexical predictability (the activation of a particular word form), we analyzed morphosyntactic predictability (the activation of morphological features of words) and its effect on reading times over and above lexical predictability. We found that for predicting reading times, cloze and corpus-based measures of both lexical and morphosyntactic predictability explained the same amount of variance. However, cloze and corpus-based lexical probabilities both independently contributed to a better model fit, whereas for morphosyntactic probabilities, the contributions of cloze and corpus-based measures were interchangeable. Therefore, morphosyntactic but not lexical corpus-based probabilities can substitute for cloze probabilities in reading experiments. Our results also indicate that in languages with rich inflectional morphology, such as Russian, when people engage in prediction, they are much more successful in predicting isolated morphosyntactic features than predicting the particular lexeme and its full morphosyntactic markup.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author details:Anastasiya LopukhinaORCiD, Konstantin Lopukhin, Anna LaurinavichyuteORCiDGND
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246133
ISSN:1932-6203
Pubmed ID:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33508029
Title of parent work (English):PLOS ONE / Public Library of Science
Publisher:PLoS
Place of publishing:San Fransisco
Publication type:Article
Language:English
Date of first publication:2021/01/28
Publication year:2021
Release date:2023/11/10
Volume:16
Issue:1
Article number:e0246133
Number of pages:26
Funding institution:Center for Language and Brain NRU Higher School of Economics, RF Government [14.641.31.0004]
Organizational units:Humanwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Strukturbereich Kognitionswissenschaften / Department Linguistik
DDC classification:5 Naturwissenschaften und Mathematik / 50 Naturwissenschaften / 500 Naturwissenschaften und Mathematik
6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Peer review:Referiert
Publishing method:Open Access / Gold Open-Access
DOAJ gelistet
License (German):License LogoCC-BY - Namensnennung 4.0 International
Accept ✔
This website uses technically necessary session cookies. By continuing to use the website, you agree to this. You can find our privacy policy here.